Medical Condition and Geographic Factor

[ArmyGuy99]

:-[

Just trying to be nice, like my mommy taught me.  Besides my RTW plan only has me working 3 days /week.  I gotta do something constructive. ;D

 

[brian8225]

brian8225,

Sorry to hear about your letter from the RMO.  Do not be discouraged though.  As stated before there is an appeal process.  Read the letter carefully, in it it will state exactly why you do not meet UoS.  You stated earlier that you still need to wait 3-5yrs to be medically clear of the CA.  perhaps that is the reason and you will have to wait.  I do not know, I have not seen your file and I have not worked the medical side of recruiting in a number of years.

Be patient, hang in there.  If you are not sure, contact the Medic/PA/Sgt at the Medical Section of the Recruiting Center and speak to them about it, they are the SME's and can explain it to you.  Speaking from experience.  Go in person if you can, bring the letter.  They have a copy, but it's been filed already.  They will be able to explain what you will need to challenge the decision and how long you will have to wait.

Good Luck, Don't Give Up

Going back and reading it again, there's actually a mistake in their conclusion as they linked me to the wrong diagnosis. Basically, they noted I have Condition A which is a byproduct of something that was suspected in early reports that I submitted but later refuted, and is far more terrible than what I actually have.  I am guessing I will need a new letter that more explicitly states what it actually is, as Condition A that they have in here isn't even a real condition, and the linkage to the something more terrible is wrong. I've had genetic testing done, and the testing for the more terrible option was negative and also is contradictory to my medical history. Again when I say this is rare, this is something that most oncologists wouldn't know about without doing supplemental research.

What I do have still results in higher risk than the rest of the world and requires periodic followup, so I could still be hooped either way. It is a significant difference though of "may get cancer by about age 65" vs. "90% chance of cancer by 40 without major surgery".

I called my med tech and he still haven't received the file back from the RMO, so I'll see what he thinks tomorrow when we're scheduled to talk again.

If I can get a letter stating:

1) Followup is ideally annual, but can go be long as 3+ years without an increase in risk to myself or others, and
2) The condition isn't the terrible one but something that just increases the risk profile of the person,

would that satisfy the UOS requirement, or is the "need for followup" a black/white thing with no out?